I have followed and participated in Uganda politics since before independence. Those at Butobere, Ntare, Rukungiri, Nairobi, Berkeley (USA), Arusha, Brussels (Belgium), Addis Ababa, Lusaka and Mbabane (Swaziland) where I was born, studied or worked and now New York where I reside will recall the political discussions we had and are now having about the desire for Ugandans and Africans to take charge of their own destiny. The lesson I have learned is that when people are determined for change, they will get it regardless of the hurdles on the way. We used to hear that Africans were not ready for independence. They needed more time and guidance. They were like children beginning to walk or to ride a bicycle. Some even argued that people in Southern Africa would never be liberated in our lifetime. Ready or not, the people of Uganda and Africa pushed on and got independent.
The discussions concentrated not so much on leaders but on ideas and the benefits to all that would come with independence. A leader would be a person considered capable to implement those ideas. Thus, leaders would be selected not on circumstances of their birth but their potential to deliver on the agreed upon agenda. Although Uganda politics was dominated by religion the ideas about independence were the same. I recall vividly a conversation I had at Butobere School with a fellow Catholic student that we needed to work together (Protestants and Catholics) because we shared the same ideas about independence. Leaders should not be selected based on faith or circumstances of their birth but on capability to deliver on the agreed upon ideas. They should prove that they are capable to lead. And we agreed! Similarly in choosing a future leader of Uganda competence, character, background, dedication and above all patriotism should serve as the only guide.
The people of Uganda welcomed NRM not because of the charisma of their leaders but because of the ideas contained in the ten point program; a well prepared, balanced and consensus document – a document written for all Ugandans. Every Ugandan saw something in it for them. Those still on the fence decided to join because of the idea of national unity reflected in the first cabinet and appointments in other branches of government. That is why Ugandans were ready to tighten their belts even when they lost a lot of money as the old currency was replaced by the new one (do you remember the 30 percent service charge and dropping two zeros from the currency?). They did so because they thought that was a wise investment for a better future for them and their children. They fully understood the economic logic (save, invest and accumulate wealth for a better tomorrow).
The abrupt and unceremonious abandonment of the ten-point program in 1987 without consultations raised eyebrows and a bit of anger. People did not see the difference in the new program and the one implemented by UPC government in the first half of the 1980s that was so unpopular and contributed to Obote II’s government downfall. We were told to be patient and pragmatic. Things had changed after the launch of the program. However, things would work out fine in the not too distant future, the government assured us. Meanwhile Ugandans were warned that the short period would be tough. Those of us who followed the discussions were told that the short period would last three years or so. We were told that balancing the budget, controlling inflation, removing the state from the economy, liberalizing the economy and increasing exports had to be done to clean up the house. This translated into removing subsidies and introducing school and health fees, closing or downgrading schools (from secondary to primary level), retrenching public servants, reducing money in circulation, raising interest rates, devaluing the currency, opening up Uganda markets, exporting more foodstuffs to generate foreign exchange earnings and recruiting foreigners to manage Uganda’s economy.
Increasingly, Ugandans did not like these ideas and began to demand changes. They demanded a new government popularly elected by the people accountable to them which NRM was not having captured power through the barrel of the gun not the ballot box, eventually forcing the 1996 elections. The unpopularity of NRM became clear as the opposition presidential candidate gained ground in the campaign. NRM got scared and harassed the opposition candidate virtually preventing him to campaign in some areas considered NRM stronghold. NRM even threatened to go back to the bush if it lost the election. Rigging saved the day and NRM got elected. Subsequent elections have become less democratic with rigging of the electoral process and changing the constitution to remove presidential term limits. Rampant corruption and sectarianism have discredited NRM as a party that has benefitted a few. At the start Ugandans were afraid to express their opinions freely for fear of brutal security forces response. Thankfully, Ugandans are gradually shedding fear and psychological barriers that prevented them to speak up. They are coming up with new ideas about jobs, land ownership, education, immigration and even the East African political federation. They are even warning leaders from neighboring countries to desist interfering in Uganda’s domestic affairs and tampering with national sovereignty. Ugandans are demanding a political and development model that will accommodate and benefit all Ugandans equitably.
NRM government and its supporters at home and abroad need to realize that there is a wind of change blowing across Uganda. Ugandans have begun the struggle to get what is in their best interest. They have passed the stage of childhood where decisions are taken for them. However, they will need a helping hand but one that will advance the date of victory, not delay it. At the international level, Ugandans need a Macleod former British Colonial Secretary who released political prisoners and advanced independence dates in East Africa. Ugandans in the opposition need to come together quickly under one leader whom they believe can deliver on the ideas outlined above. This should be someone without a hidden record, or history or agenda. Ugandans in NRM need to identify a leader willing to work with the opposition and join hands because Uganda belongs to all of us. No one should be left behind in the changes that are sweeping across Uganda. Ugandans should make choices about their destiny collectively. The primary responsibility for saving Uganda from further decline belongs to Ugandans – all of them. Ugandans should not accept imposed ideas from domestic, regional and international sources. Ugandans have already prepared a well received National Recovery Plan (NRP) that has been widely circulated including to the NRM government.
Let me end on a very important note. First, Uganda youth have a critical role to play in laying the foundation for a better future. As a first step, you need to overcome fear, remove psychological barriers and act as one. When you demonstrate do so peacefully. When you break the law you face consequences. Identify those in the demonstrations (who may be NRM supporters) that cause disturbance and report them to the police or your leaders. Second, Uganda women the future is in your hands. From time immemorial women have changed the course of history. You have heard about Rosa Parks (USA) and Emmeline Pankhurst (UK) among many others. Third, religious leaders you have a responsibility to protect and promote the interests of your flock. You spoke passionately about the plight of Uganda people on Christmas Day (2011). You need to continue to speak on their behalf like Pope John Paul II, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Cardinal Sin (Philippines) and many others. Fourth, Uganda security forces your duty is to protect Uganda and her people against foreign invasion and maintain law and order while citizens exercise their rights and freedom without government interference. We appeal to you to be on the side of the people or stay neutral when Ugandans and the government are sorting out their differences. Draw lessons from the security forces decisions in Iran in 1979 and Philippines in 1986. Fifth, NRM should compromise because Uganda belongs to all. Winner-take-all games should be abandoned in favor of win-win arrangements. There is an olive branch out there: reach for it and you won’t regret.